Summing up “the soul of man”

[Jim Parker]

Shouldn't we use the most literal translations,

There is no such thing.
The original languages were not just words with single-word equivalent meanings in modern English. (A language which would not appear for about 1700 years after the last NT document was penned.)

The original writings also bear with them the nuances of the culture in which they were written. When those words are translated into modern English, the modern English brings with it the nuances of our modern, western, socialist society all of which is completely foreign to the minds of the original writers.

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)



DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[freewill]

Was every man born with an immortal soul? It seems like a possibility

Free, do you or do you not believe man was born with an immortal soul?

Notice that man can do no more than killing the body, yet God can cast into hell, after killing the body. Just what is it that God is casting into hell? And if it's just a cessation of existence, what is there to fear? Why so many dire warnings by Jesus regarding hell if nothing happens other than ceasing to exist?

Let me try and explain again what I see: Man was made mortal with the ability to acquire immortality through knowing God and His goodness. In the beginning Adam was made mortal with the ability to acquire immortality by eating from the tree of life whereby he would then live forever.

I also see God telling us that when a man dies in this life his body and consciousness will at some time be made alive again, either for glory or for the judgement and condemnation, but only when the wisdom and justice of God so wills; and whilst it has been made clear to me there is a punishment of endless torment awaiting the vilest of unrepentant evil souls who know God and the good revealed to us through Jesus Christ, it has also been made clear to me there is a punishment of eventual annihilation for those least offensive souls who were born to die never rightly knowing God or knowing and understanding of the good which they ignored and offended - (often because of the corruption and hypocrisy found in many churches). Whatever physical or mental suffering those least offensive might receive before their final termination will to some degree depend upon whatever suffering or terror they maliciously willed or inflicted on others without good reason and without remorse. “He will render to each one according to his works”, justice will then be done and will be seen to be done; whilst all who were given knowledge and understanding of the truth and despise and hate the good so clearly revealed through Jesus Christ, and seek only to keep fulfilling their depraved desires to seduce and corrupt, torture and destroy whoever or whatever they know is good shall forever be seen to have been justly given the greater condemnation, and justice will be seen by all to be done.

The truth is all we have to hold creation together and to keep us sane, all then who know the truth well and now hate and reject the truth and know also the terrible corruption and suffering they continually crave to cause shall indeed reap what they sow: A continuing demonic hatred for the truth and for God and creation, together with an endless need to twist and bury the truth will only bring an endless conflict with God, with the self and with others. Such lost souls shall be given what they need – a complete separation from God, truth and sanity, and their endless insane conflict in their eternal fire of destruction will only bring them endless torment.

“the soul who sins shall die.” Ezekiel 18:43, ESV, KJV, NKJV, and depending on God's decisions and judgements, immortality will be given or denied.

God will give immortality to whoever He decides shall have immortality. He will give a punishment of endless torment to whoever He decides will deserve to suffer a punishment of endless torment. He will also give a punishment of endless death to whoever He decides will deserve to ultimately suffer a punishment of endless death...and He will give endless glory to whoever He decides will be made ready to receive endless glory.

...and nowhere in Scripture does God tell us every condemned soul will be kept alive and conscious in the lake of fire forever.

 

[Jim Parker]

Man was made mortal with the ability to acquire immortality through knowing God and His goodness.

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
When Jesus destroyed the power of death to destroy man's physical being, He gave immortality and incorruptibility to all mankind. (1 Cort 15:52-53) We will experience that immortality and incorruptibility when Jesus returns.

As you said, that was God's original intention and why He placed the "tree of life" in the garden for man to eat as he wished. (Gen 2:9) But, when Adam sinned, access to the tree was taken from him (Gen 3:22) because it would not bode well for mankind to be a race of immortal sinners becoming ever more vile and evil in their ways.


iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)



DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[freewill]

When Jesus destroyed the power of death to destroy man's physical being, He gave immortality and incorruptibility to all mankind. (1 Cort 15:52-53) We will experience that immortality and incorruptibility when Jesus returns.

I see again that you chose not to include the previous verses 50 and 51 which do help to explain more of what the apostle Paul was saying to the church at Corinth: 50 “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” 51 “Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.”

The word “we” is referring to the apostle Paul and the members of the church at Corinth, and any others who truly believe in Jesus Christ. Verse 52 then reads “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead” - (those Christians that have fallen asleep) “shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.”

If all of chapter 15 is read carefully, the context in which the verses in question were written then becomes clear: Paul was correcting the Christians at Corinth who were confused concerning the resurrection. Some in the church were actually saying “there is no resurrection of the dead” verse 12.

When Paul wrote “neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” he was also then explaining what will happen to the corrupted souls who remain corrupt: they will not inherit incorruption. In other words they shall remain corrupt. And Paul was referring only to the dead in Christ, when he wrote “the dead shall be raised incorruptible,” or "imperishable" as the ESV puts it.

As for me then I see Paul neither saying nor implying that all mankind will be made immortal as you would have us believe.


To cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love. I am Sorry if you cannot agree.

 

[chessman]

When Jesus destroyed the power of death to destroy man's physical being, He gave immortality and incorruptibility to all mankind. (1 Cort 15:52-53)

If your claim about 1 Cor 15:52-53 is accurate, then how come Jesus says God can destroy man's physical being (and soul too) in Hell?

Matthew 10:28 (NASB) Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.​

Could it be that your referenced proof Text doesn't actually say that He gave immortality to all mankind. But rather He gave immortality to all brethren in the kingdom of God, not to those headed to Hell???

1 Corinthians 15:50-57 (NASB) Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.​

Yes, that's it. The "we" that will be changed from perishable to imperishable are "brethren'. Victorious through our Lord, brethren. Not 'all mankind'.

1 Cor 15:52-53 does NOT say all mankind are victorious or changed. Paul's talking about "brethren" in this passage. Obviously.

 

[Jim Parker]

Paul was referring only to the dead in Christ, when he wrote “the dead shall be raised incorruptible,” or "imperishable" as the ESV puts it.

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
I disagree. If Paul meant "only the dead in Christ" he would have said "only the dead in Christ." But he didn't . He said "the dead."
Otherwise, what would be the physical condition of the unrighteous dead? A pile of dust? Rotten flesh?
There is no indication in scripture that there will be a physical difference between the resurrected righteous and the resurrected condemned.

Flesh and blood will not inherit the Kingdom. True.
Jesus ascended into heaven BODILY, not "flesh and blood" but "flesh and bone" as he specifically told the apostles he had after His resurrection. (Luke 24:39)
And when the saved enter into the kingdom of heaven, they shall be like Him; "flesh and bone." (1Jo 3:2)

While we are here on the earth, before the general resurrection, our life is in the blood. (Lev 17:11)
Then, the life will be in the Holy Spirit.

1Pe 3:18 "For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit;"


iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)


DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[freewill]

As you said, that was God's original intention and why He placed the "tree of life" in the garden for man to eat as he wished. (Gen 2:9) But, when Adam sinned, access to the tree was taken from him (Gen 3:22) because it would not bode well for mankind to be a race of immortal sinners becoming ever more vile and evil in their ways.

So am I right in thinking that you agree with the following?

In Genesis 3:19 we can see what God said after Adam gave in to Satan’s temptation and died spiritually on the day he valued his desire to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil above his Father’s warning: “By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return”. The fallen Adam then was clearly told that not just his physical body but the whole corrupt person he had become was going to return back into the state of dust before he was made, and there is nothing here to suggest that that state was going to be anything other than precisely that: the state of dust before he was made – (i.e. a state of zero awareness of anything).

In Genesis 3:22–24 we are told that God was not going to allow the corrupted person whom Adam had become to live forever. After God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever” this is what happened next: God drove the man out from the Garden of Eden and then placed “cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life” in order to keep fallen man from eating and living forever.

To cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love.

 

[Jim Parker]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In Genesis 3:19 we can see what God said after Adam gave in to Satan’s temptation and died spiritually

I can't respond without a clarification of exactly what you mean by "died spiritually."

The fallen Adam then was clearly told that not just his physical body but the whole corrupt person he had become was going to return back into the state of dust before he was made, and there is nothing here to suggest that that state was going to be anything other than precisely that: the state of dust before he was made – (i.e. a state of zero awareness of anything).

Unless you are suggesting that the soul is the body (per JWs and 7th Day Adventists) I do not agree. The body was 'made from dust" and it "returns to dust." The soul? Well, now we're in very speculative territory.


iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)


DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[Bick]

The more literal translation of 2 Thes.. 1:6-9 by J.B.Rotherham is:
"If at least it is a righteous thing with God to recompense affliction unto them that afflict you and unto you that are afflicted release with us,---By the revealing of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his messengers of power in a fiery flame; holding forth vengeance---against them that refuse to know God and them who decline to harken unto the glad-message of our Lord Jesus,---who indeed a penalty shall pay---age-abiding destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might---"

The destruction is "age-abiding".

 

[freewill]

I can't respond without a clarification of exactly what you mean by "died spiritually."

I googled the meaning of spirit and came up with this, “the non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character”, which I suppose is as good a way as any for describing how I see the spirit of man. Let me explain more of what I meant then when I said “Adam gave in to Satan’s temptation and died spiritually”.

God’s first and only warning to perfect man was, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you will surely die” Genesis 2:16-17. What I see being reasoned and preached by Calvinists and others concerning this verse though is that because Adam kept on living after the day he ate the forbidden fruit, the word die in Genesis 2:17 cannot mean die as in the literal meaning of the word but instead it should be accepted as meaning separation from God whilst remaining alive. What I also then see being reasoned (partly because of this change of meaning) is that it must be right to believe that when our body dies our soul which includes our senses and awareness and our ability to reason and perceive will carry on living forever, and every spirit and soul of man therefore remaining separated from God at the time of physical death will finish up living forever in a fire of endless torment.

John Blanchard whose books are held in high esteem by many evangelicals, in reference to Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 3:6 once wrote regarding Adam and Eve, “their experience illustrates perfectly a vital biblical doctrine which is that death never means cessation but separation” (Page 55 of “Whatever Happened to Hell?”).

I can see this long established “vital biblical doctrine” as it is called, appears to have been accepted by most evangelical Christians as a fundamental truth, but what I can’t understand is how anyone can seriously believe it is right to alter the meaning of the word die in Genesis 2:17 when there was clearly a very real and instant death the very moment the free and perfect yet curious and naive Adam, listened to Satan and ignored God. Through valuing his own desire to know good and evil above his Father’s warning, the pure and innocent spirit of humility and truth that ruled in Adam was confounded and corrupted into a self first spirit of lies and rebellion against God. The spirit that once formed the heart of the ruling character in Adam was now dead in Adam. The moment Adam gave in to Satan’s temptation to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then that person whom God had created perfect changed into something alien to God. Adam had become a child of the god of evil, an offence to all that is good. The Adam whom God created and had fellowship with was no longer living and by not taking into account this spiritual death as well as other Scripture references that refer to man’s mortality, a doctrine has been formed that has changed the meaning of “death” from ceasing to live into “separation”. John Blanchard again: “their experience illustrates perfectly a vital biblical doctrine which is that death never means cessation but separation”.

By continually using this doctrine as well as using other verses from Scripture that clearly describe everlasting torment for those most evil of the condemned, many have been easily led to accept that physical death for everyone who remains unsaved must be a door to an endless life of endless torment and terror. As for me though, not only do I not see a good reason anywhere why I should believe the meaning of this word die in Genesis 2:17 doesn’t mean die, which is what the so called “vital biblical doctrine” would have me believe, but neither do I see a good reason why I or any freethinking mind of reason for that matter should believe the meaning of God’s words “the day that you eat of it you will surely die” should be altered to mean: “the day that you eat of it you will not surely die, you will become separated from your Maker but your senses and your awareness and your ability to reason and perceive will surely carry on living forever”; which I have to say sounds more like what the serpent said Genesis 3:4-5.


Can you see what I mean by “died spiritually” now? Can you see why I believe the pure and innocent spirit of humility and truth that formed the character of Adam ceased to live when Adam valued his desire to know good and evil above his Father’s warning?
Can you see that to cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love?

The soul? Well, now we're in very speculative territory.

God willing I will come to that later.

 

[Jim Parker]

Genesis 2:16-17. What I see being reasoned and preached by Calvinists and others concerning this verse though is that because Adam kept on living after the day he ate the forbidden fruit, the word die in Genesis 2:17 cannot mean die as in the literal meaning of the word but instead it should be accepted as meaning separation from God whilst remaining alive.

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
That is not a necessary conclusion. It is not necessary to understand that meaning of "in the day you eat of it you shall die" as meaning we must choose between the interpretations that either they would (1) drop dead by the end of the day or (2) die "spiritually."

In the day that they ate of the fruit (in the instant) they became aware of good and evil. The immediate result was that they saw that they were naked.
They didn't already know that?
No, they did not because they were innocent knowing only God. (Good)
The statement that they saw that they were naked reveals to us that the capacity to experience lust had entered into their consciousness and with it the potential to choose to sin.
The wages of sin is death. When they sinned by disobeying God, death entered into their being making their physical death an inevitability.

John Blanchard whose books are held in high esteem by many evangelicals, in reference to Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 3:6 once wrote regarding Adam and Eve, “their experience illustrates perfectly a vital biblical doctrine which is that death never means cessation but separation” (Page 55 of “Whatever Happened to Hell?”).

So how does Blanchard explain physical death? That statement seems to me to beg the question rather than answer anything about death.

...neither do I see a good reason why I or any freethinking mind of reason for that matter should believe the meaning of God’s words “the day that you eat of it you will surely die” should be altered to mean: “the day that you eat of it you will not surely die, you will become separated from your Maker but your senses and your awareness and your ability to reason and perceive will surely carry on living forever”;

I see a reason why: because it does not say that.

Can you see what I mean by “died spiritually” now? Can you see why I believe the pure and innocent spirit of humility and truth that formed the character of Adam ceased to live when Adam valued his desire to know good and evil above his Father’s warning?

It was not just to know good and evil; it was to be a God like God; i.e. to be his own God.
Being one's own God is the basis of all sin. It is the choice to be self sustained rather than to trust God to provide for all your needs. That attitude toward life leads directly to greed, avarice, envy, theft, lust, strife and murder; the cause of every war.

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)


DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[freewill]

Can you see that to cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love?

 

[freewill]

Genesis 2:16-17. What I see being reasoned and preached by Calvinists and others concerning this verse though is that because Adam kept on living after the day he ate the forbidden fruit, the word die in Genesis 2:17 cannot mean die as in the literal meaning of the word but instead it should be accepted as meaning separation from God whilst remaining alive.

That is not a necessary conclusion. It is not necessary to understand that meaning of "in the day you eat of it you shall die" as meaning we must choose between the interpretations that either they would (1) drop dead by the end of the day or (2) die "spiritually."

God told Adam "in the day that you eat of it you will surely die". You don't have to believe it, but that is what God told Adam would happen and that is what happened:
Through valuing his own desire to know good and evil above his Father’s warning, the pure and innocent spirit of humility and truth that ruled in Adam was confounded and corrupted into a self first spirit of lies and rebellion against God. The spirit that once formed the heart of the ruling character in Adam was now dead in Adam.
The moment Adam gave in to Satan’s temptation to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then that person whom God had created perfect changed into something alien to God. Adam had become a child of the god of evil, an offence to all that is good. The Adam whom God created and had fellowship with was no longer living and by not taking into account this spiritual death as well as other Scripture references that refer to man’s mortality, a doctrine has been formed that has changed the meaning of “death” from ceasing to live into “separation”.

John Blanchard whose books are held in high esteem by many evangelicals, in reference to Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 3:6 once wrote regarding Adam and Eve, “their experience illustrates perfectly a vital biblical doctrine which is that death never means cessation but separation” (Page 55 of “Whatever Happened to Hell?”).

So how does Blanchard explain physical death? That statement seems to me to beg the question rather than answer anything about death.

Blanchard was referring to the death of the persons of Adam and Eve, I thought that would have been obvious. What he and many others have been indoctrinated to believe because of Adam and Eve's experience, is that when our body dies our soul which includes our senses and awareness and our ability to reason and perceive will carry on living forever.

...neither do I see a good reason why I or any freethinking mind of reason for that matter should believe the meaning of God’s words “the day that you eat of it you will surely die” should be altered to mean: “the day that you eat of it you will not surely die, you will become separated from your Maker but your senses and your awareness and your ability to reason and perceive will surely carry on living forever”;

I see a reason why: because it does not say that.

It is true God never said to Adam your senses and your awareness and your ability to reason and perceive will surely carry on living forever, but that is what many have been indoctrinated to believe God actually meant. And this my friend is the unbiblical doctrine (Satan's lie) which is still being taught in many churches today: “death never means cessation but separation”

Can you see what I mean by “died spiritually” now? Can you see why I believe the pure and innocent spirit of humility and truth that formed the character of Adam ceased to live when Adam valued his desire to know good and evil above his Father’s warning?

It was not just to know good and evil; it was to be a God like God; i.e. to be his own God.
Being one's own God is the basis of all sin.

The basis of all sin is pride - a high or inordinate opinion of one’s own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority. Adam seriously believed he could be like God when his pride through temptation took control over his ability to reason correctly.
When Satan lied and convinced Eve he was speaking the truth and she ate and gave some of the fruit to Adam, and when the temptation of becoming like God became too much for Adam, then he no longer believed or cared about God's warning either.

Oh how easy it is to be deceived when our pride takes control.

“You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate."
...and they died spiritually that very day.

...and can you see that to cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love?

 

[Nathan]

Adam and Eve had to have died spiritually that day or else God would have been saying something He cannot say.

It could not have meant that they just died metaphorically either. They obviously had the capability to sin before they sinned - or else they would not have sinned.

 

[Jim Parker]

You don't have to believe it,

Please don't tell me what I do or do not believe.
I explained my understanding.
If you didn't understand it, just ask. I'll try again.

 

[freewill]

Please don't tell me what I do or do not believe.

Sorry but I don't recall telling you what you do or do not believe.
I do know however, that I definitely told you “You don't have to believe it”, in other words, I told you that you didn't have to believe what I wrote regarding Genesis 2:17. Read the first 3 paragraphs of post #113 again and see.

Let me repeat exactly what I did write though. “God told Adam "in the day that you eat of it you will surely die". You don't have to believe it, but that is what God told Adam would happen and that is what happened:
Through valuing his own desire to know good and evil above his Father’s warning, the pure and innocent spirit of humility and truth that ruled in Adam was confounded and corrupted into a self first spirit of lies and rebellion against God. The spirit that once formed the heart of the ruling character in Adam was now dead in Adam.”

I wrote that because you replied to the first paragraph (in which I was dealing with Calvinistic doctrine) with this…

Jim Parker said: ↑
That is not a necessary conclusion. It is not necessary to understand that meaning of "in the day you eat of it you shall die" as meaning we must choose between the interpretations that either they would (1) drop dead by the end of the day or (2) die "spiritually."


Well I believe Adam and Eve died spiritually is a necessary conclusion, they never dropped dead before the end of the day, therefore they must have died spiritually...and dying spiritually also fits in with what God said: “but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

However, like I said, you don't have to believe it if you don't want to. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe just as you are also free to believe God will keep the least least knowledgeable and least offensive of condemned souls in torment forever if that is what you really want to believe. But there isn't a single good reason, biblical or moral, why you should.

God never told Adam that his physical death will mean his senses and his awareness and his ability to reason and perceive will carry on living forever, in fact there is no record of Him telling any of us that we were born with immortal souls. Neither has He told us that every condemned soul will be made to live in torment in the lake of fire forever. Such an unbiblical concept is not the work of the Holy Spirit and it slanders the name of God.

...and can you see that to cause or allow any suffering beyond what is necessary for the eternal safety of creation would be as offensive to the God of love and reason as it would be alien to reason and love?

 

[WIP]

you are also free to believe God will keep the least least knowledgeable and least offensive of condemned souls in torment forever if that is what you really want to believe. But there isn't a single good reason, biblical or moral, why you should.

I'm curious...can you post the Scripture where the least offensive vs the most offensive are defined?

 

[Jim Parker]

But there isn't a single good reason, biblical or moral, why you should.

Thank you for our opinion.

 

[freewill]

I'm curious...can you post the Scripture where the least offensive vs the most offensive are defined?

I'm not sure I can find any verses in Scripture where the least offensive vs the most offensive are clearly defined.

Why do you need to know? Has it not been made obvious that there have been many kinds of lost souls, atheists, agnostics, homosexuals, humanists, prostitutes and whoremongers, and many others who were born to die unsaved, and yet showed kindness and care to others in need, sometimes risking or giving their lives for their sake, even for the sake others who they do not know, and yet have lived and died ignoring the Gospel message, preferring the thought of the endless cessation of their lives rather than live without their worldly pleasures and their deluded sense of freedom?

Has it not been made obvious to you that there are many others who share in Satan’s knowledge of the truth, having his hatred and contempt for the truth and seek only pleasure satisfying their sadistic desires and needs which they know will cause the greatest offence to God and creation? Can't you see that there are those who have degenerated into such depravity that their desire is to be filled with joy whilst they see innocent children being terrorised, tortured and destroyed?

Don't you agree that we do not need Scripture to tell us there is a vast and obvious difference between the least and the most offensive of lost souls?

 

[Mike]

I'm not sure I can find any verses in Scripture where the least offensive vs the most offensive are clearly defined.

Why do you need to know? Has it not been made obvious that... (insert unsubstantiated claim here)

You are active in the wrong forum if you must ask why he needs to know. Please see these rules for posting where you are.

Making claims and disputing those of others MUST include scripture to support the position. This is the Theology Forum; not the Lounge, and it's not Reddit. I suggest you either find scripture to support this or drop it.